International organisation for standardisation organisation internationale de normalisation
Yüklə 7,38 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- JCTVC-O0006 JCT-VC AHG report: Range extensions draft text (AHG6) [J. Sole, D. Flynn, C. Rosewarne, T. Suzuki]
- JCTVC-O0007 JCT-VC AHG report: Range extensions software (AHG7) [K. Sharman, D. Flynn]
- JCTVC-O0008 JCT-VC AHG report: Screen content coding (AHG8) [H. Yu, R. Cohen, A. Duenas, D.-K. Kwon, T. Lin, J. Xu]
- JCTVC-O0009 JCT-VC AHG report: High-level syntax for HEVC extensions (AHG9) [M. M. Hannuksela, J. Boyce, Y. Chen, S. Deshpande, A. Norkin, Y.-K. Wang]
- JCTVC-O0014 JCT-VC AHG report: Colour gamut scalability (AHG14) [A. Duenas, A. Segall, P. Bordes, J. Dong, K. Kwon, X. Li]
- JCTVC-O0015 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC hybrid codec scalability (AHG15) [J. Boyce]
- JCTVC-O0016 JCT-VC AHG report: Single-Loop Scalability (AHG16) [M. Wien, M. Budagavi, K. Mishra, K. Ugur, X. Xiu]
- JCTVC-O0018 JCT-VC AHG report: high bit-rate and bit-depth operating points (AHG 18) [K. Sharman, H.Y. Kim]
- JCTVC-O0019 JCT-VC AHG report: Verification test preparation (AHG19) [T.K. Tan, V. Baroncini, M. Mrak, W. Wan, M. Karczewicz, J. Wen]
- JCTVC-O0020 JCT-VC AHG Report: Multi-layer hypothetical reference decoder (AHG20) [K. Suehring, A. Tabatabai, S. Deshpande, M. M. Hannuksela, J. Kan, A. K. Ramasubramnian]
- JCTVC-O0021 JCT-VC AHG Report: Best-effort decoding with reduced decoding complexity (AHG21)
- JCTVC-O0022 JCT-VC AHG Report: Test sequence material (AHG22) [T. Suzuki, R. Chen, T. K. Tan, S. Wenger]
AHG reports (22)The activities of ad hoc groups (AHGs) that had been established at the prior meeting are discussed in this section. (Reviewed Wed 23rd except as noted otherwise.) 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.86JCTVC-O0001 JCT-VC AHG report: JCT-VC project management (AHG1) [G. J. Sullivan, J.-R. Ohm] In the interim period since the 14th JCT-VC meeting, the 12th HEVC Test Model (HM12) software and text had been produced, three interim Core Experiments on range extensions (RCEx) and four Core Experiments on scalable extensions (SCEx) were run. In preparation of the 15th meeting, progress was made towards definitions of Scalable HEVC (SHVC) extensions and range extensions into higher bit depths and non-4:2:0 colour sampling. Advancing the work on development of conformance and reference software for HEVC and its extensions was also a significant goal. Needs for corrections to version 1 were considered, and a verification test plan was set up for HEVC version 1 performance testing. The work of the JCT-VC overall had proceeded well and actively in the interim period. Active discussion had been carried out on the group email reflector (which had 1741 subscribers as of 2013-10-21), and the output documents from the preceding meeting had been produced. Except as noted below, all report documents from the preceding meeting had been made available at the "Phenix" site (http://phenix.it-sudparis.eu/jct/) or the ITU-based JCT-VC site (http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jctvc-site/2013_07_N_Vienna/), particularly including the following:
Note: The "H" document, in this case, remains valid as the latest approved software guidelines.
The various ad hoc groups and the seven core experiments had made progress, and various reports from those activities had been submitted. The software for HM version 12.0 had been prepared and released approximately as scheduled. Progress was made to build the software for SHVC and Range Extensions on top of HM 12 as well. Since the approval of software copyright header language at the March 2011 parent-body meetings, that topic seems to be resolved. Released versions of the software are available on the SVN server at the following URL: https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_HEVCSoftware/tags/version_number, where version_number corresponds to one of the versions described below – e.g., HM-12.0. Intermediate code submissions can be found on a variety of branches available at: https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_HEVCSoftware/branches/branch_name, where branch_name corresponds to a branch (eg., HM-12.0-dev). Various problem reports relating to asserted bugs in the software, draft specification text, and reference encoder description had been submitted to an informal "bug tracking" system (https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/trac/hevc). That system is not intended as a replacement of our ordinary contribution submission process. However, the bug tracking system was considered to have been helpful to the software coordinators and text editors. The bug tracker reports had been automatically forwarded to the group email reflector, where the issues were discussed – and this is reported to have been helpful. It was noted that contributions had generally been submitted that were relevant to resolving the more difficult cases that might require further review. The ftp site at ITU-T is used to exchange draft conformance testing bitstreams. The ftp site for downloading bitstreams is http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jctvc-site/bitstream_exchange/. A spreadsheet to summarize the status of bitstream exchange, conformance bitstream generation is available in the same directory. It includes the list of bitstreams, codec features and settings, and status of verification. Approximately 330 input contributions to the current meeting had been registered. A significant number of late-registered and late-uploaded contributions were noted. However, the relatively early upload deadline established for the current meeting (2013-10-14, nine days in advance of the meeting) has helped to enable advance study of most technical input material. A preliminary basis for the document subject allocation and meeting notes for the 15th meeting had been circulated to the participants by being announced in email, and was publicly available on the ITU-hosted web site. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.87JCTVC-O0002 JCT-VC AHG report: HEVC test model editing and errata reporting (AHG2) [B. Bross, K. McCann (co-chairs), W.-J. Han, I.-K. Kim, J.-R. Ohm, K. Sugimoto, G. J. Sullivan, Y.-K. Wang, T. Wiegand (vice-chairs)] An issue tracker (https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/trac/hevc) was used in order to facilitate the reporting of errata with the HEVC documents. A total of 7 issues with the HEVC version 1 specification were reported on the tracker following the 14th JCT-VC meeting. No issues were reported on the tracker with the HM11 Encoder Description during this period. The HM12 Encoder Description was produced as JCTVC-N1002. Further editorial changes to HEVC version 1 have been proposed for consideration at the 15th JCT-VC meeting in JCTVC-O0054. Two issues were mentioned in discussion as possibly needing further work:
Regarding the planning for the HM encoder description – there has been a plan to improve this in AHG work toward publishing as part of the RS standard. It remained TBD whether this would be in v.1 of the RS standard or be added later. This work has generally not been proceeding as well as has been hoped. See also notes for O0054. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.88JCTVC-O0003 JCT-VC AHG report: HEVC HM software development and software technical evaluation (AHG3) [F. Bossen, D. Flynn, K. Sühring] (Discussed prior to upload.) HM 12 software was released quickly. No further update "dot" releases had been released since then until the meeting began. A restructuring of SAO and a few bug fixes had been readied, and field coding remained in need of work. A 12.1 release was made during the meeting. An issue with field coding is that fields are ordinarily coded in pairs, but leading pictures are not allowed to follow trailing pictures in the bitstream. The tested solution is to code the temporally second field of a frame first as a CRA picture, and have the first field be a leading picture. The picture output flag is not implemented in the HM, and some other aspects of picture output handling may not be correct. A brief summary of activities related to each mandate is given below.
Multiple versions of the HM software were produced and announced on the JCT-VC email reflector. The following sections give a brief summary of the changes made for each version. A detailed history of all changes made to the software can be viewed at https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/trac/hevc/timeline. Released versions of the software are available on the SVN server at the following URL: https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_HEVCSoftware/tags/version_number, where version_number corresponds to one of the versions described below (eg., HM-11.0). Intermediate code submissions can be found on a variety of branches available at: https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_HEVCSoftware/branches/branch_name, where branch_name corresponds to a branch (eg., HM-11.0-dev). HM 12.0 was released on August 6, 2013. This version is identical to HM 11.1 given that little time was available after the 14th JCT-VC meeting to produce this version. It should be noted that this version includes support for coding field sequences. The coding performance did not change compared to HM-11.0. HM 12.1 had not yet been released, but was expected during the 15th JCT-VC meeting. This version contains additional bug fixes as well as fully rewritten code for the SAO tool. Unless the release has been tagged, the development branch can be found under https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_HEVCSoftware/branches/HM-12.0-dev There were no performance changes expected for HM 12.1. Recommendations
14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.89JCTVC-O0004 JCT-VC AHG report: HEVC conformance test development (AHG4) [T. Suzuki, W. Wan] The ftp site at ITU-T is used to exchange bitstreams. The ftp site for downloading bitstreams is, http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jctvc-site/bitstream_exchange/ A spreadsheet to summarize the status of bitstream exchange, conformance bitstream generation is available in that directory. It includes the list of bitstreams, codec features and settings, and status of verification. So far, 128 bitstreams were collected. Most of them were updated to the HM10 syntax. However, two bitstreams are still based on the older version of the spec. Those bitstreams must be updated based on the final spec of the HEVC, as soon as possible. The generated bitstreams are available at http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jctvc-site/bitstream_exchange/draft_conformance/ The features and conformance point of each bitstream are summarized in the attached Excel sheet. One relevant contribution was noted: JCTVC-O0084 (Editor's proposed draft text of HEVC conformance testing). The AHG recommended to discuss the plan to collect missing bitstreams, and to continue to collect more bitstreams, especially for corner cases. Some issues noted to be missing from the conformance test set included the output flag, LTRPs, and combinations of features. It was remarked that a few of the bitstreams that have been collected have problems that have been identified, and have not yet been corrected. It was noted that some of the available bitstreams do not obey the established conventions, such as file naming and MD5 checksum file formatting. It was agreed to produce an output document to capture and call attention to the guidelines. The current status was discussed and updated. It was agreed to append a tabulated description of the current status in the output draft (study text status for WG 11 purposes). 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.90JCTVC-O0005 JCT-VC AHG report: HEVC range extensions development (AHG5) [M. Naccari, C. Rosewarne] In preparation of N1006, the RExt CTC, the AHG had been asked to consider shortening the sequences. It was concluded that the SCC sequences should not be shortened. The N1006 output did not shorten the sequences. However, the sequence length tested in RCEs 2 and 3 was shortened for non-SCC cases. There was no substantial discussion on the reflector. Relevant contributions were listed in the report. There was a substantial number of contributions noted – esp. on intra block copy and high bit-depth processing. Contributions relating to RCEs were not listed in the AHG report.
Three versions of JCTVC-N1005 were published by the Editing AhG following the 14th JCT-VC meeting in Vienna. Versions were based upon JCTVC-L1003_v34. The text of JCTVC-N1005 (revision 3) was submitted for the ISO/IEC DAM ballot (WG 11 N 13763 ISO/IEC 23008-2:201x/DAM1). Changes in JCTVC-N1005 relative to the previous version were reported as follows:
JCTVC-O0007 JCT-VC AHG report: Range extensions software (AHG7) [K. Sharman, D. Flynn] The HM10.1_RExt3.0 software was upgraded to HM11.0_RExt3.0, then HM11.1_RExt3.0, and then HM12.0_RExt3.0, with all three revisions released on Friday August 23rd, three weeks after the end of the Vienna meeting. These revisions reflected the changes made to the main HM branch of the software and were tested accordingly. On the same day, the development code for RExt4.0 with changes for all tools was announced, and a request was made for proponents to verify their tools. A few necessary changes were made, and HM12.0_RExt4.0_rc1 was released on Wednesday August 28th. Further problems were identified by proponents and HM12.0_RExt4.0_rc2 was released on Saturday 31st August, and after more testing, HM12.0_RExt4.0 was released on Thursday 5th September. Unfortunately the intra-reference-smoothing tool was being disabled when it should have been enabled, and vice versa, and HM12.0_RExt4.1 was released on Tuesday September 17th to address this issue, and also an issue regarding distortion costs for inter when FULL_NBIT was enabled (for RCE2/3-AHG18 test conditions). The changes adopted to this HM12.0_RExt4.1 were due to the following proposals:
The process of patching the software was made significantly more complicated since there were additional tools added that interacted with other tools. The AHG report discussed some interactions between these features as illustrated below. Quantization interaction with RDPCM was mentioned as needing cleanup. 
Test results without SCC were reported. Encoding time increased, coding efficiency somewhat improved, and decoding time was essentially unaffected. In the 4:2:2 case, the change of the chroma QP mapping caused a shift of bits from chroma to luma. JCTVC-O0008 JCT-VC AHG report: Screen content coding (AHG8) [H. Yu, R. Cohen, A. Duenas, D.-K. Kwon, T. Lin, J. Xu] Many emails talked about the issues in reporting the overall compression performance by various measures for the lossless coding case. The test conditions for RCE2 and RCE3 were discussed and finalized jointly by the participants of RCE2 and RCE3 and AHG8. Overall, these discussions, suggestions, and comments helped the finalization of the test materials, test conditions, and test result report template for RCE2 and RCE3. Due to the difference in content characteristics, video format, sequence length, etc., the average bit rate saving and the average compression ratio that are calculated in the Excel template have created some confusions. After some extensive discussions, min, max, and overall compression ratio were added to the test result template. A bar graph showing results for every sequence was also found to be useful for visualization purposes. To better address the issue, experts also suggested creating sub-categories, based on the key video and visual parameters, for the existing and future test sequences. This is still an on-going discussion. Perhaps, calculating compression ratio gain for each sequence and then taking the average of these sequence based compression ratio gain is also something helpful. A few changes were made to the test sequences again this time. Per the discussion in the last meeting in Vienna, some of the 4:4:4 screen content test sequences have been put into a separate “Optional” group. Furthermore, the computer animated content, such as VenueVue, sc_viking, and sc_viking have been grouped into an “Animation” group. See the complete list of the test sequences in groups in the table in the AHG report. It was commented that the coding characteristics of the animation material were similar to camera-capture video.
It was noted that there was a substantial number of relevant contributions. Regarding the high level syntax for auxiliary pictures with consideration of JCTVC-N0063/JCT3V-E0049 as well as signalling for carrying alpha channel and 4:4:4 chroma enhancement as auxiliary pictures, the following was noted:
Regarding JCTVC-N0355/JCT3V-E0092 and other mechanisms to extend the number of layers (beyond 64) in comparison with reserving nuh_layer_id value of 63 to provide an extension, in terms of functionality supported and signalling efficiency, two related input contributions were noted: JCTVC-O0137 and JCTVC-O0200. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.91JCTVC-O0010 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC core experiments (AHG10) [X. Li, J. Boyce, P. Onno, X. Xiu] The configuration files of SHVC core experiments, the anchor data and the reporting sheets were released on Aug 28th 2013 as attachments to JCTVC-N1009. It was proposed to not generate an AVC based anchor – no objection was raised on the JCT-VC email reflector when this was announced. Reporting sheets were created for SCE4 (Color Gamut and Bit-Depth Scalability). The AHG generated single layer high quality anchor data for SCE4. One relevant contribution, JCTVC-O0097 (AHG10/AHG12: On SHVC common test conditions) was identified. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.92JCTVC-O0011 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC text editing (AHG11) [J. Chen, J. Boyce, Y. Ye, M. Hannuksela] The SHVC draft 3 and SHVC Test Model 3 text were developed from the SHVC Draft 2 and SHVC Test Model 2 text according to the the outcome of the 14th JCT-VC meeting in Vienna, AT (25 Jul. – 2 Aug. 2013). The main activities performed by AHG11 are as follows:
The SHVC bug-tracker (https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/trac/shvc) should be used to report issues related to SHVC Draft and Test Model text. Relation with the common HLS text in MV-HEVC (which is currently duplicated in the HSVC draft) – should target an integrated text for new edition as early as possible. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.93JCTVC-O0012 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC software development (AHG12) [V. Seregin, Y. He, T.-D. Chuang, D.-K. Kwon] The current latest software version SHM3.1 contains all the items adopted last meeting, however more work has to be done on the following items and will be addressed in the next software release:
Bug tracker was set up and available at https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/trac/shvc Informative downsampling tool has been implemented as a standalone project and it currently supports 1.5 and 2x downsampling. Three software versions have been released by AHG12, integration details and performance summary are given in the next subsections. In the document, only HEVC base layer results are provided and AVC base layer data can be found in the accompanying excel tables. Performance results are consistent with the adopted techniques. Software version SHM3.0 based on HM11 was released according to the schedule and the following items have been integrated into this version:
During testing of SHM3.0, two issues were identified and fixed in SHM-3.0.1:
SHM3.0.1 software version was recommended for CE experimentation. SHM3.0.1 performance relative to the SHM2.0 based on CTC was summarized and more details can be found in the accompanying excel tables. Remaining adopted items have been integrated on top of SHM3.0.1 version, software base was updated to HM12 and was released as SHM3.1. SHM3.1 performance relative to the SHM3.0.1 with CTC was summarized and more details can be found in the accompanying excel tables. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.94JCTVC-O0013 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC inter-layer filtering (AHG13) [E. Alshina, J. Chen, J. Dong, A. Segall, P. Topiwala] There had not been discussions related to the mandates of this ad-hoc group over the reflector between the 14th JCT-VC meeting and the 15th JCT-VC meetings. However, there was significant activity in the area within the SCE1 and SCE3 core experiments. Two versions of down-samplers with different spectral characteristics (so-called SHVC and JSVM down-samplers) were provided by Qualcomm for SCE1 experiments. Test sequences down-sampled with non ×1.5 and ×2.0 ratios were generated and shared by Samsung. Specific spatial ratio (~×1.75) was selected to exploit more or less equally intensively re-sampling filters with all 16 phases. These sequences were used in SCE1 tests for identification the best re-sampling filter design for arbitrary spatial ratio scalability support. The performance of two scalable systems with different down-samplers was studied as part of AhG13 activity. Corresponding contribution is submitted to this meeting. So-called SHVC down-sampler was found to be better for all-intra, random access and low-delay-B configurations. This was discussed during the AHG report presentation, and assurances were given regarding the subjective quality, sharpness, and lack of excessive aliasing in the proposed SHVC down-sampler. “SHVC downsampler has better performance than JSVM” – there was some discussion whether this statement would be true under all circumstances, e.g. with usage of rate control. Several experts emphasized that the JSVM downsampler has higher frequency cut-off, and subjective viewing had been performed earlier unveiling better subjective performance at base layer. An effect of accurately taking into account chroma position alignment during re-sampling processing was studied. There is one contribution on this issue. One more contribution which re-open the discussion about taking into account displacement between base and enhancement pictures was submitted to this meeting. There was one non-SCE contribution which proposed modification of SHVC re-sampling process. In SCE3 and non-SCE3 contribution 2 different inter-layer filters which are applied additionally to re-sampling were studied. Relevant contributions were listed.
This report was presented in a scalable coding track Thu 1800. There were approximately 17 e-mail messages related to the mandates of this ad-hoc group over the reflector between the 14th JCT-VC meeting and the 15th JCT-VC meeting. Potential test sequences were provided by Technicolor and announced on the reflector on July 11, 2013. The sequences were made available on the Hannover FTP site under /scalable/sequences/CGS and on a new FTP site. There were seven contributions related to the topic of wide color gamut scalability. No viewing was planned, since no display was available that is capable of displaying the BT.2020 color gamut. JCTVC-O0015 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC hybrid codec scalability (AHG15) [J. Boyce] The reporting template and anchors using an AVC base layer were not updated for the SHM 3.0 software. At the previous meeting, there were no technical contributions using the anchors provided for the SHM 2.0 software. It was proposed on the reflector to not update the template and anchors, and there were no objections. In addition to the email discussion related to the SHM 3.0 anchors, there was active discussion on the main JCT-VC reflector related to support of encapsulation for hybrid codec scalability. Several different approaches to encapsulation were discussed, and the need for encapsulation was questioned. A question was raised about support for an AVC interlaced base layer with an HEVC enhancement layer. Three relevant contributions were noted (JCTVC-O0143, JCTVC-O0166, JCTVC-O0190).
The participants in the related core experiment SCE2 on key pictures and single loop scalability reportedly had an intense offline discussion with an exchange of more than 300 emails among the proponents and participants. Four proposals on SCE2 and HLS (and several cross-checks) were noted. The proposal contributions JCTVC-O0145, JCTVC-O0162, and JCTVC-O0227 are responses to SCE2 on key pictures and single-layer decoding. The corresponding crosschecks are listed in the report. Contribution JCTVC-O0175 contains the high-level syntax proposals to replace the discardable_flag which can be useful for indications related to single-loop decoding. Contributions JCTVC-O0145 and JCTVC-O0162 contain results for modified versions of the proposed schemes which are beyond the content of the corresponding proposals to the Vienna meeting, JCTVC-N0202 and JCTVC-N0186, respectively. Therefore, these aspects are not considered to be part of the SCE2 response but are seen improvements relative to the previous proposals which have been tested and evaluated according to the SCE2 conditions. In JCTVC-O0145, results for a modified scheme are presented where the deblocking filter and SAO are enabled for the base layer reconstruction of the key pictures. In JCTVC-O0162, a modified scheme is presented using the compressed BL motion information to generate the alternative picture without using BL residue. As a summary of the performance impact, the results for these proposals are summarized in the tables below, following the reporting format of the SCE2 summary report. It is recommended to synchronize the discussion of these results with the discussion of SCE2. Rate-distortion results were summarized, and relevant documents were surveyed. 14.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.95JCTVC-O0017 JCT-VC AHG report: SHVC complexity assessment (AHG17) [E. Alshina, M. Budagavi, J. Dong, E. François, J. Kang, X. Li, A. Tabatabai] The following aspects were taken into account during complexity assessment:
Block based inter-layer prediction model was taken into account during complexity assessment. Complexity assessment s/w module was modified compared to previous versions as follows:
Complexity assessment materials (after all bug fixes) were released to SCE coordinators at the middle of September. In the worst case 2 layers SHM3.0 decoder is 2 times more complex compare to HEVC single layer decoder (both from view point of memory access and number of multiplications). Graphs and tables summarized the complexity measurement for 2 layers SHM3.0 decoder compared to HEVC single layer coding. In the so-called “all intra” test scenario, all frames of the base layer are Intra coded (it means there is no memory access or multiplications associated with interpolation process). But for the enhancement layer, an interpolation process is needed for inter-layer texture prediction. In this case, the average memory access for scalable system is more than double (spatial ratio ×1.5) when compared to single layer coding. For the most frequently expected to be used spatial ratio of ×2, memory access in so-called “all intra” test scenario were ~150% compared to HEVC single layer. The complexity increment in this test scenario is the highest among all, but the BD-rate drop of a two-layer scalable system compared to HEVC single layer coding is 11-14% (the smallest among all tests). In test scenarios with motion compensation, the average memory access of a two-layer scalable system compared to single layer coding is from ~120% (spatial ratio ×2) to ~190% (SNR test == spatial ratio ×1). Multiplications number is from 124% (spatial ratio ×2) to ~176% (SNR test == spatial ratio ×1). The BD-rate drop 2 layers scalable system shows compare to HEVC single layer is 18%, 25% and 27% for random access, low-delay-B and low-delay P configurations correspondently. Statistics was collected during SCE2 experiments. The number of samples processed by motion compensation, intra prediction, SAO and de-blocking was reported and analysed both for the anchor and proposal tests. Five related contributions were identified.
A bug was immediately identified and reported in the Vienna draft text to the editors, and more recently a bug report was filed (#1185). This relates to the text not including the increased precision during the inverse-transform stage – the text permits coefficients of bitDepth+7 bits (signed) in the bitstream and at the output of the inverse-quantizer, although it currently downshifts all bitDepth+7 data to 16 bits (signed) prior to the inverse transform, thereby only increasing the accuracy of the inverse quantization and applying an unbalanced clipping scheme at the output of the inverse-quantizer. However, bitDepth+7 was so designed because the transformed coefficients could be at most bitDepth+7 in size, and therefore reduction of the precision before the inverse transform would negate any benefit of having bigger values in the bitstream. The RExt4 model uses bitDepth+7 throughout. However, a comment on #1185 has been made on this issue requesting the C model to be changed to convert all data back to 16 bit (signed). Related contributions were noted. These include test sequences, RCE2 and non-RCE2 contributions, Source video test material, throughput, precision analysis, and two others. JCTVC-O0019 JCT-VC AHG report: Verification test preparation (AHG19) [T.K. Tan, V. Baroncini, M. Mrak, W. Wan, M. Karczewicz, J. Wen] Reviewed Tue. 29th (GJS). The encoding conditions proposed appear to be stable and no further discussions were made. However, as the changes in the HM12.0 are minimal, the bitstreams that were already encoded in HM11.0 were used for the selection of the test sequences Candidate test sequences were obtained from the following sources:
There were also content proposed by BBC (see JCTVC-O0332) and Elemental, but these content have not been included in the assessment thus far. The following methodology for selecting sequences and bitrates were used.
The following numbers of test sequences were shortlisted:
Please refer to document JCTVC-O0267 for details of the shortlisted sequences and suggested bit rates. The question of using the BT.2020 color format for the 4K sequences was raised. However, after some offline discussions it was concluded that this might not be practical as it was reportedly unlikely that 4K displays would be available that adequately support the BT.2020 specification. It was remarked that perhaps an objective measurement based evaluation (e.g. PSNR-based) of BT.2020 coding could be done as part of the VT effort. It was encouraged to explore this possibility in future AHG work. The group viewed some of the available test sequences. Participants were encouraged to contribute test sequences suitable as subjective test material covering test resolutions that have yet to achieve the targeted number of sequences. It was agreed to target completion of the subjective testing by the March/April meeting. JCTVC-O0020 JCT-VC AHG Report: Multi-layer hypothetical reference decoder (AHG20) [K. Suehring, A. Tabatabai, S. Deshpande, M. M. Hannuksela, J. Kan, A. K. Ramasubramnian] There was light email traffic and discussions, totalling three messages, mainly to capture and clarify the essence of problem and issues being addressed and whether in sync with the AHG20 mandate. A statement shown below reflects a reported USNB position regarding HEVC Multi-layer delivery: The USNB of WG 11 requested for HEVC multi-layer extension plans to be harmonized with systems specifications such that some operation mode(s) are enabled with a layer-specific buffer flow model rather than a whole-bitstream buffer flow model, and bitstream multiplexing and picture association are established using system-level functionality rather than multiplexing within a single video bitstream. Operation with an AVC base layer and an HEVC scalability enhancement layer should also be supported Four related input contributions were noted.
Reviewed Thu 31st morning (GJS). A contribution on the topic that summarizes the previous work, provides some new data for a 12-bit process, and provides very high level text description was provided in JCTVC-O0043.
There is an intention to maintain a document which lists test sequences, licensing conditions, etc. Existing and newly offered test sequences were described in the report. Six relevant contributions and two checks of coding performance were identified. Gathering information on licensing statements for test material would be beneficial. Viewing of test sequences was suggested during this meeting.
|